Emptiness
I always find such works of art fascinating in so many ways. In this case, I notice what is not present as much as what is. This gentleman appears to have lost his heart and gut (instincts?), but his brain is intact. He is alive, yes, but maybe not living. His expression is determined, but weary….or hardened. Note that he seems to be returning from some far away locale across the sea…or maybe has left the buildings and people of that much more familiar place in the background. And what of his…what? It seems too large for the briefcase of a businessman, but too small to be the suitcase of a tourist. Or is it simply a symbol of the “baggage” he carries? Finally, he is alone, with no family or companions. Is that why he is…well…empty?
Spiritually speaking, there are many accounts of extraordinary figures who have found Revelation or Enlightenment or some Epiphany or other. But Lao Tzu was content to leave society, writing his “Tao Teh Ching” only as an afterthought at the request of the ferryman carrying him away into oblivion. It is hard to believe that his expression would be the same as this gentleman. The Buddha did return to his society, but with the glow of “awakening” after fasting and meditating at the Bodhi Tree. How would a sculptor represent that glow? Jesus becomes a recognized “Savior” after his isolation and confrontation with Satan in the wilderness, but his “Crown of Thorns” must convey a radically different message. Moses , that self proclaimed “stranger in a strange land,” has the closest encounter with God of anyone in the Old Testament, but he never does reach “The Promised Land.” He was able to save his people, but could not save himself. In the case of this sculpture, maybe the gentleman should have his back to us as he faces the sea? Would that be more hopeful or despairing?
This individual–Is “gentleman” too presumptuous, based on the cut of his hair, though there is no suit or tie?–seems to be returning with no more understanding, and certainly no more feeling, than when he left. Whatever experiences he has had have left him…well…empty, once again. Imagine if the sculpture were different…that his chest was full and his skull was vacant? No, that would probably not be better. Different, yes, but not necessarily better. Only when both the mind and heart are healthy with blood flowing through both can the individual be whole…and maybe “holy.”
Arthur, Thank you (again) for pointing all the possible interpretations of this piece. It reminds me of day-to-day communication with others. As my daughter and I were getting ready to go for a hike recently, I came into her room as she was tying her shoes. I was slathering sun block on my exposed skin and said, “Do you want some sun screen?” She looked at me with a blank face and replied, “What do you mean?” (I thought it was pretty obvious given the question and gestures.) She continued…”Do you want to share yours with me? Would you like to give me some? Are you asking that we take your sunscreen with us?” etc. Then we talked about the gap in communication. Whew! I am always amazed by the gap between what I’ve intended to communicate and what the listener hears or interprets. Can this also be true of art?
Hi, Gloria,
Thanks for the thoughtful comment. Yes, I think it is true of art…and maybe everything. Someone else looking at this sculpture thought the man might very well be a refugee, which never occurred to me but, in hindsight, also make a lot of sense. A big part of the challenge is that we don’t only need to understand the words. We also need to understand the context in which people are communicating. Many people understand the value of empathy when it comes to sharing feelings. Not too many people recognize the value of empathy when it comes to understanding what someone else is saying…”between the lines,” as they say. Cancer survivors and war veterans, for example, recognize when another means it when they say: “I get it. I know how you feel.”
Arthur